I understand that it may be problematic sometimes but this was very smooth. I didn’t even say anything.

A: what’s your number for the whatsapp group Me: I don’t have whatsapp because of facebook. B: ok, we have to use signal then A: ok

And that was it. Life can be very easy sometimes

  • shadowwwind@fosstodon.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    @GravitySpoiled I love this, I had a very similar situation with my sports group, litte questions asked as well! Best thing was the reaction from the leader “I you are kind of right anyways, we should get rid of WhatsApp.”
    Problems only appeared later down the line with people complaining that they don’t get notifications and it’s not a habit for them to check it, so they don’t see new messages.

    • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m assuming OP didn’t just accept a position with the fucking Hezbollah, so Signal probably fits his usecase

      It’ll be fine. If the fucking CIA wanted OP to spill the beans they’ll just send an agent with a wrench directly to OP’s kneecaps.

  • abbenm@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    For a second I thought you meant you don’t use Signal, so they all went there on purpose to avoid you.

  • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    People dont install Signal for me, especially feo groups. They use arguments like “yeah, and I also might have reasons not to use Signal like I do with Whatsapp”

    Kinda disrespectful to put a line against a data selling app and comparing it to “nah, I just dont wanna”

    • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I convinced my family by telling them I won’t use anything else. Use Signal or don’t talk to me. Win win

      • frengo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        They Uno Reversed this on me. “We’re already on Whatsapp, you’re isolating yourself”

  • SLfgb@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Signal is so bloated compared to Conversations on Android. Also it’s a walled garden requiring your ph number to register (edit: and requires owning a smart phone👎). Based in the US so not great for privacy. Marginally better than Whatsapp suppose.

    Edit: and it requires a smart phone.

    • threeganzi@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not that I will convince you to use signal, but there are desktop versions as well, so technically not required to use a smart phone.

    • SLfgb@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Signal app size 165MB. Conversations: 42MB.

      I can’t message someone on Signal without installing Signal or Molly which also uses Signal servers, which has to be trusted on good faith (can’t run my own). Ergo a walled garden just like Whatsapp.

      I can’t register with just a username & password. I have to trust their PR saying they don’t store my ph #.

      US has some of the worst legislation when it comes to privacy; when the agencies decide they want your data, Signal will not be allowed to tell you. And don’t give me the bs line that they only store 3 pieces of info about you. Unless you’ve built their server software you don’t know what they collect am store.

  • MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Before Signal made the boneheaded move of removing SMS support, it was so much easier for me to pitch the idea of using Signal to my friends and family, most of which eventually did make the shift from SMS to Signal messages for reasons like ease of use when it came to group chats, sending images/videos, voice clips, etc.

    But now? Now it’s one of those embarrassing moments where I hear back from people basically all saying "your tech recommendations are usually on point but uh, what happened with Signal???" because the app just abruptly stopped supporting SMS and ruined the seamless appeal. SMS support was the perfect way to ease people into shifting towards Signal messages and now the only damn people I know who still know Signal are my most privacy-minded friends/family, while everyone else has switched back to WhatsApp.

    Clearly I’m not bitter…😅

          • akilou@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            The benefit is that Signal displaces the default sms app and is also Signal. Rather than having to jump between 2 apps.

            • zingo@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Well, they partly took that “feature” away because people thought they were sending encrypted SMS messages which is not true. False sense of security.

              They just took the secure high road and ditched SMS. It also made the app leaner with a smaller attack surface.

              I think they did the right decision. Signal is the secure choice for the masses.

              Having said that, I’m using Molly-Foss as it has less footprints, no Google messaging framework, leaner than Signal, with no crypto payment, and an encrypted database at rest.

          • ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            the core benefit was in adoption. it was easy to get parents, for example, saying that they jist have to bother with one app for all of their messaging.

            the minute they have to contend with sms and signal, they don’t mind adding whatsapp in the mix as well.

          • Kevin@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Signal started out as textsecure, an sms/mms app that encrypted your text messages. It quietly started sending messages over its server at one point after an update, but before that sms is what it was about.

      • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Think it was related to the messages being insecure and signal didn’t want people to be confused.

        If your using signal your messages should be secure. SMS messages aren’t secure. It may have been clear to you when Signal send an sms or an encrypted message, but they need to cater to everyone.

          • Luke@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            I think you underestimate how oblivious many users are when it comes to using software.

            • toastal@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Honestly that was the initial appeal. Grandma didn’t notice or care that the old SMS app was hidden & just thought there was an update. That ignorance meant she was talking in an encrypted fashion where possible even if accidentally. And since you will need a SMS app anyhow for OTP & other one-off notifications, might as well have it all in one spot. The fact it is different is probably more confusing to some users.

              And without that appeal, the missing server code history, the US government funding, centralized service, the requirement of a SIM card (which many places now require ID to get so they can register you in a database), as well as the requirement of bowing to the mobile duopoly (can’t use the service if you have a KaiOS, Linux, or other phone—or without a phone), I don’t know there is much of an appeal. In hindsight, I wish I hadn’t gotten my family on it since I would love to ditch Android.

        • doctortran@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          That just feels like shooting themselves in the foot. Just inform the user SMS isn’t secure. That’s it.

          Not being willing to trust the user with the information so they can make a choice is asinine. It’s the same reason why I stopped using Tuta. Complete privacy and security are great but if there’s no option to make things a little more open for the sake of convenience or interconnectivity, I’m just not interested.

          Security and privacy shouldn’t be a prison.

          • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            You can’t target UX to the average person. It won’t work for most people. You need to target those that struggle with technology the most to make it accessible.

            Signals main unique selling point is its security, not its ease of use. If people fall into useing signal in a insecure way, it can be hard to say signal is a secure messaging app. As many people may be using it insecurely.

        • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          I guess what I want now is a client for both protocols that works like the old app. That would cater to me - I don’t remember which person is on which app so I keep ending up on SMS because it has everyone.

    • akilou@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I totally agree. And to make matters worse, one of their arguments was that supporting SMS was taking resources away from developing other features. But what mind blowing features have come out since they dropped SMS? Usernames, I guess, which they were working on anyway. New app icons…

    • GravitySpoiled@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I don’t have to. Matrix is coming anyway. It’s not an if but a when.

      For official (internal) company communication though I will advertise matrix instead of signal. I’ll report back once I’ve talked to the right people about it.

    • Spectrism@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Because it’s proprietary garbage. If there are FOSS alternatives, I’m most definitely going to use them instead of proprietary software, let alone proprietary software by companies like Meta. And since there are plenty of those alternatives: No WhatsApp for me.

    • DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Meta owns it, and meta is one of the large, evil tech corps.

      They are probably the easiest one for most people from English-speaking countries to cut from their lives.

        • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Well, WhatsApp is owned by Facebook. They are a large player, so they are under a bunch of scrutiny.

          But at the end of the day, WhatsApp clearly states it takes all this information. They only claim to keep your messages end-to-end encrypted.

          I wonder if this applies to text messages only, or to things like voice memos, images/videos, gifs, etc. as well.

          WhatsApp doesn’t let you send documents if you don’t give it full access to your files. Sure, maybe they pinky-promise don’t do anything but this is Facebook we’re talking about.

          The same caveat goes for photos and videos - you can’t even send a photo if you don’t give it the camera permission and gallery access, something it clearly doesn’t need just to send a single picture.

          Additionally, WhatsApp loads previews of websites. Sure, on the privacy violations list that’s pretty low-priority but I’d still like to not have a link contacted before I can take my 3 seconds to look at it and decide wether it’s worth clicking. Especially since a lot of my contacts send obvious scams (“send this message to 10 contacts for a chance to win a free iPhone” type bullshit mostly).

          Revoking WhatsApp’s contacts permission will not show peoples’ nicknames - it will only ahow numbers. Yet you have to give yourself a nickname on WhatsApp, so they clearly have some interest in your contacts. Otherwise they wouldn’t block it outright when it’s an already implemented feature to show nicknames for numbers not in the contact list.

          All quite suspicious if you ask me. Although I don’t work in cyber security so it’s clearly just incoherent rambing from me.